[alooPotato]

This is another incredible value that YC provides. In the same way YC helps prevent investor bad behavior, it also prevents company bad behavior on behalf of candidates. Not saying it was intentional from the companies, but just makes sure everyone keeps candidate experience top of mind.

[adenozine]

I mean, it actually completely failed in this instance to prevent bad behavior, so...?

I think you are meaning to say that it can bring accountability to these companies, in which case I'd agree.

[samtho]

If you’re willing to give some inexperienced companies the benifit of the doubt, you can reasonably assume they just might not have it together yet. I doubt there was mal-intent, it sounds like budgets and headcount got yanked back, which sucks for both the candidate and the team that is trying to hire.

In a larger company I’ve worked at (and have hired for), they had a process where if the candidate passed the first 2 interviews, you basically get a formal “intent to hire” process started which reserves money for the position that cannot be withdrawn except for VP-level intervention.

[arkitaip]

Does it work well if two YC companies failed OP in the same manner?

[evolve2k]

I think the parents point was along the line of, when YC companies do slip, there’s someone around willing to step up and take responsibility and likely behind the scenes push those companies to do better.

[ryankicks]

"hi, it's me. i'm the problem it's me."

but in seriousness, i'm one of the people here trying to uplevel hiring at YC startups, and at startups more broadly.

this thread is helpful for me to know what we can do to make startup hiring (and working at a startup) better. i'm appreciative for the comments/voices here so i can keep learning.

[joecool1029]

> "hi, it's me. i'm the problem it's me."

thank you very nice PR man. u r doing a very good job of preventing founders from experiencing discomfort and making the meat feel cared for.

> but in seriousness, i'm one of the people here trying to uplevel hiring at YC startups, and at startups more broadly.

That's cool, but what pressure is there actually against practices like this if the companies aren't even named? Am I supposed to believe you call up a founder and go: 'uh hey, can you get your churn under control? We're getting complaints'.

What does this conversation sound like? Is it like: 'Oh, is negative word getting out publicly?' 'nah, they didn't name you, its under control' 'ah good. Well Ryan, we want the best, the absolute best and that requires trying lots of candidates I just don't see a problem, OP was nice person but just not a good fit for us' 'ok, makes sense, thanks founder, you guys are doing great, keep up the good work'

[csomar]

I wonder if this would have been swept under the rug if it didn’t get to this point in public.

[alooPotato]

exactly this

[solarmist]

My understanding is that YC is very opt-in to everything they offer. There is no requirement to seek them out for advice or recommendation.